5 dead, 16 hospitalized in mass shooting at Highland Park 4th of July parade, shooter being sought

Can you please quote using the PF quote function anyone saying they want what you say they WANT.

 

All you folks that are so obsessed with a registry and believe 70% of Americans want their guns registered—why don’t you create a voluntary registry. It’s legal. It’s supported by the vast majority of Americans. Maryland has such a system at the state level. Why do you need government to force something with such wide public support and with such passionate advocates? Just curious.

 

Yes it is effectively a register. The 4473 registers the purchaser's and gun details which are then accessible to the authorities.

In other words scanned which is what I wrote not what you made up that I wrote. To trace a gun using a serial number means that someone has to go through all the records of that gun store one by one until the serial number is seen. All that time could be saved for future gun purchaser's if a searchable data base is created

No charges were pressed by those that accused Crimo of threatening to kill everyone in the house. There is no record of repeated threats. If someone is accused of threatening violence should he be banned from buying a gun? In many domestic arguments someone says I'm going to kill you in the heat of the moment.

 

yeah it would be, such a scheme is brought up almost yearly

 

If it were a registry, the “authorities” would know how many and what specific guns I possess.

Scanned and stored in digital format so they can be searched without having to dig them out of boxes and bags. A searchable data base is prohibited by law—law resulting from the democratic process.

If someone is deemed enough of a threat weapons are confiscated from them by police, such threats and the subsequent confiscation should be considered when issuing that person a permit to purchase firearms and ammunition. Otherwise what is the point of that law? Can you document weapons being confiscated in the theoretical domestic arguments you refer to?

I have seen reports of a single incidence of violent threats from this perp and reports of multiple. I’m not sure which is accurate. It’s also been reported he used two very different firearms. Even if it’s a single threat deemed credible enough to confiscate weapons it should be considered since the FOID system is set up to prohibit such people from having firearms.

 

Err, all scans are in digital form
They do search it using eyesight. How archaic is that! For what purpose is a searchable data base not allowed. It only results in delays. The end result is the same

His knives were confiscated two and half years ago because he threatened to kill himself not anyone else. Should all suicidal thinking people be banned from owning a gun even though they were in that mental state two and a half years ago?

At a later date he was accused of saying that he will kill everyone in the house but those accusations were dropped

Reports that I've seen say that he used one gun in the shooting. He had another gun in the car when caught and considered carrying out another mass shooting. He had three further guns at home

 

It was never intended to be a registration easily accessed. Quite the opposite.

No. The confiscation of knives and sword was in 2019 when he threatened to kill his family. The suicide thing was earlier in 2019 and he had contact with mental health professionals following that incident with police.

At first it was reported as a “high powered rifle”, then an obscure Italian firearm, and then a S&W M&P-15. Who knows. Only coroners and investigators know for sure.

 

No that is just another irrational uncivil ad hominem personal attack launched at someone who has politely disagreed with you on a discussion form.

This is the Inconvenient Truth:
All of the infamous gunfights associated with the Earp, Masterston, Hickok et al occurred where the law abiding citizens were disarmed. Just like violent modern DP ruled urban hell holes.

 

just stop that nonsense/ You all want to harass lawful gun owners because many of us don't buy into your political agenda. The specious nonsense that those of us who oppose stupid gun laws, somehow don't care about dead children is bullshit. In reality, those of you who want laws designed to harass honest gun owners while not impeding criminals, are the ones who really help criminals ply their violent trade, unabated

 

The thing about gunstore records is that out of my 11 or so guns, exactly none of them are store bought. I've inherited some, bought some from private parties, but the guns I did buy from a store are long gone, having grown tired of them and selling or trading them for others.

Gunstore records are largely inaccurate as a result.

 

Via the warrant process?

 

So this is when background checks started?

 

Why would a searchable paper form of 4473s not be a register but a digital searchable database of those same 4473s be a register?

 

You are right about the timeline. So should what someone said but did not do two and a half years ago be considered in allowing someone to have a gun?

It was always reported as a high powered rifle. The deputy chief on a later day misspoke when he talked about the other gun found in the car (Kel TRC) and it came across as if he was talking about the gun used but in the same broadcast said that an S&W was the weapon used. In this thread only Esperance has talked about an obscure Italian rifle and he also was spreading lots of fake news

 

There's no location mentioned in the profile: http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?members/truth-and-justice.56294/

 

I am in England

 

Yeah, but polling is irrelevant to what should be law.

 

True. But very rarely does anyone vote on single issues. Even a national referendum on a single issue can be ignored by those in government. So to claim that Americans do not want a national register is not a fact. A poll is closest one can get to knowing what Americans want

 

Well then you must have revealed it in a post which @557 saw one day! Because it's not in your profile.

 

No warrant is needed. Once you submit a 4473 you have essentially given permission for to the ATF to share it with law enforcement if they request it.

 

Oh ok. I was only going by what @Hotdogr said.

 

The full “instant” NICS background check we have today was implemented in 1994.

Prior, it was only the 4473 backed by penalty for providing false information.

 

I based my statement that a warrant was needed because I read this:

"During compliance inspections, can the inspecting officer physically take all of the dealers Forms 4473 back to his office for further review at his convenience?

The Forms 4473 are the property of the licensee until that licensee goes out of business and submits the records to the ATF Out of Business Records Center. ATF may, with the licensees consent, take the Forms 4473 off premises. If done, ATF will issue a receipt for the forms, which the licensee is expected to retain in his permanent records until the forms are returned. The receipt, at a minimum, should contain the date the forms are being removed from the premises and the total number of forms involved..."

(emphasis mine)

So, If the forms are the "property of the licensee", then it follows that the ATF would need a warrant to force the FFL to allow the ATF to examine them. Of course, the FLL could, and probably would, VOLUNTARILY allow the ATF to examine the records without a warrant. But, that still does not amount to a federal registration database, which was my point.

If @557 has better information, then I will stand corrected.

 

It wasn’t 2.5 years ago. They issued the perp a FOID card 3 months after the second interaction with police where an alert was sent to the State Police. The perp admitted to drug use at that time, which is a prohibition on obtaining a FOID card and a firearm under 4473 requirements. So within 4 months of two police interactions where he admitted to prohibitive actions, had mental health services offered, weapons confiscated, and a report filed with State Police he acquired a FOID card and purchased the firearm used in the mass shooting.

This isn’t about me. It’s a case where a system set up to prevent dudes just like this guy from having firearms was not actually used as intended. Laws that inconvenience law abiding citizens every day in Illinois were not used for their intended purpose. So what is the point of adding laws if we aren’t going to use the ones on the books now?

This was a classic example of “red flag” law failing.

Shy not just look at the dang thing, read the markings on it put there by the manufacturer, and report that? Then everyone knows what’s going on. When people familiar with firearms hear “high powered rifle” we assume historical definition and it is something in a larger bore game hunting cartridge playing games with terminology just detracts from credibility of law enforcement and reporters. Look at the roll marks and report them. S&W M&P-15. Simple. Easy. Honest. Credible. No misunderstandings.

What happened to “assault rifle” or “weapon of war” or “AR-15”? Is there not enough negative connotation associated with those terms now and we have to come up with something that sounds scary again? I suppose it’s effective on the ignorant, but for critical thinkers it just makes us shake our heads seeing we are being supposedly “informed” by law enforcement and journalists who are just incompetent boobs with agendas.

I should have looked into the Italian firearm claim. I didn’t realize the claim didn’t come from media.